BLM chapter calls American flag 'symbol of hatred'

Why don't you give us some better data that shows how many students got spending increases, decreases, or remained the same instead of arguing trivia.

I'm not doing your fucking work for you.

Get off your lazy ass and do it yourself.
 
You didn't verify it, Flash because you cannot account for the fact that figure is an AVERAGE increase, not what every student saw, and we know that average is skewed by wealthier school districts who could increase their spending per pupil while other districts cannot.

We all know that. Everything you say are givens that we all understand. You don't need to state the obvious.

I missed where you used Census data to show how many students got increases, decreases, or remained stable. What post was that located?
 
You always argue against positions nobody ever took and nobody inferred.

No...these are positions you stated on this thread, Flash.

You tried to represent averages as the whole in your argument about education because if you didn't, you'd have to admit that education isn't funded equally in the US...and then you'd have to admit why it isn't funded equally in the US.
 
Why don't you give us some better data that shows how many students got spending increases, decreases, or remained the same instead of arguing trivia.

You always argue against positions nobody ever took and nobody inferred.

The fact that is U. S. is 4th in the world also means the same caveats apply to all other nations--the per pupil expenditures do not apply to "every student" in those countries. Many of those nations have students that perform better than the U. S. despite lower per pupil expenditures by $2000-3,000.
I'm not doing your fucking work for you.

Get off your lazy ass and do it yourself.

Flash has a good point that it's up to the person seeking to increase funding to justify that increase with facts.
 
The fact that is U. S. is 4th in the world also means the same caveats apply to all other nations--the per pupil expenditures do not apply to "every student" in those countries.

Except that other countries fund their schools differently than we do.

In Germany, for instance, schools are not funded by property taxes, like they are here, and all schools have a standard federalization to which every single one must adhere.


Many of those nations have students that perform better than the U. S. despite lower per pupil expenditures by $2000-3,000.

Again, not all students and not equally, what might be a $2K -$3K lower funding for a student in Germany vs. a student in Westchester, NY is probably significantly different -or even reversed- for a student in Flint, MI.

So what you're trying to do is argue against federalization by using skewed data that is not applied evenly or critically.

Basically, you're not using Critical Thinking skills here...you've passed on them for sophistry.

In those other countries, are all their students largely getting the same per-pupil spend? Probably, because those schools aren't funded by property taxes like ours are.
 
It will attract better candidates, simply put.

Say you graduate from Georgia Tech with a degree in Mathematics...you have two choices before you, you can take a job as a public school teacher and make $35K a year, or you can take a job on Wall Street and make $200K a year.

So what choice do you think that top candidate would make, 9 times out of 10?
it will then why are democrat defundng the police so they can get the scum of the earthy to take the jobs
 
Why don't you give us some better data that shows how many students got spending increases, decreases, or remained the same instead of arguing trivia.

You always argue against positions nobody ever took and nobody inferred.

The fact that is U. S. is 4th in the world also means the same caveats apply to all other nations--the per pupil expenditures do not apply to "every student" in those countries. Many of those nations have students that perform better than the U. S. despite lower per pupil expenditures by $2000-3,000.

hes to stupid to comprehend what the problems are
 
hes to stupid to comprehend what the problems are

LV426 is a woman, dumbass. Why is it all of you Trumpian cucks hate women? Is it because you were rejected by them when younger? Or was it because, as cucks, you hated them for fucking around on you?

How many times did you find yourself enjoying sloppy seconds with your own wife, Bobbie?
 
LV426 is a woman, dumbass. Why is it all of you Trumpian cucks hate women? Is it because you were rejected by them when younger? Or was it because, as cucks, you hated them for fucking around on you?

How many times did you find yourself enjoying sloppy seconds with your own wife, Bobbie?

LV426 corrected me when I said he was a woman (although he does identify with Ellen Louise Ripley).
 
Yes. Somebody referred to him as a she so I did also. He let me know he was not a woman.

I was corrected the other way once IIRC. Regardless, s/he is passionate but that emotion often overrides common sense and logic.
 
We all know that. Everything you say are givens that we all understand. You don't need to state the obvious.

I do need to state the obvious because you keep leaving it out to form false conclusions.


I missed where you used Census data to show how many students got increases, decreases, or remained stable. What post was that located?

Because I'm not doing your fucking work for you, Flash.

You should have already done that work before you made the argument here.
 
Flash has a good point that it's up to the person seeking to increase funding to justify that increase with facts.

I haven't said anything one way or the other.

Flash is the one arguing that we already spend a lot per pupil...I drilled down into that, only to find that Flash hadn't done the work.

So why should I do that work for him, when he was the one making the argument?
 
it will then why are democrat defundng the police so they can get the scum of the earthy to take the jobs

You asked what paying teachers more would do to improve education, and I told you in explicit terms precisely how you attract top talent to teach our kids by offering higher wages.

Public Schools should be competing with Wall Street firms for candidates, and they compete by offering competitive wages and benefits, just like any company or institution would in order to attract the best talent.
 
I haven't said anything one way or the other.

Flash is the one arguing that we already spend a lot per pupil...I drilled down into that, only to find that Flash hadn't done the work.

So why should I do that work for him, when he was the one making the argument?
Seems you have, but that's an irrelevant side point. Just a curiosity to understand...or be used against one. LOL

Due to all the RW Death Threat fucking morons, and a few LW ones, on the Internet, it's not wise to give out names, addresses and such but I'm good with demographics. White, male, college-educated, middle class retiree is how most groups and institutions see me. There are many other variables too. Region, bilingualism, traveling experience, ability to work and play well with others, etc. :)

Notice how easily saying "White" first can indicate social problems. Male, of course, is second. LOL

,
 
You asked what paying teachers more would do to improve education, and I told you in explicit terms precisely how you attract top talent to teach our kids by offering higher wages.

Public Schools should be competing with Wall Street firms for candidates, and they compete by offering competitive wages and benefits, just like any company or institution would in order to attract the best talent.

That's the same logic the RWNJs use to paying CEO's multimillion dollar salaries with golden parachutes while the employees are part-time (meaning 39 hours, no benefits) minimum wage earners. Obviously some adjustments need to be made.

As for raising the pay of teachers in schools, that's a State thing and even a local thing. It's also a supply and demand thing. No doubt Bulletbob can make more money giving handjobs at the community dinner table than most teachers (see list below) but teachers aren't forced to work anywhere. It's a choice. As the links and graphic show, teachers can make good money depending upon cost of living. Besides salary, there's benefits. Health and retirement plans, pensions, etc all should be figured into the equation. Also note that, while $57,813 was the average Texas teacher pay in 2017, start pay is $33,660 for college-debt laden newbie teacher. By year Five s/he is making $38,880...and still making college debt payments. BTDT.

There are smart ways to go to college and there as less smart ways.

That said, as a grandparent and good citizen, I would like to see the educational opportunities of all the kids in Texas receive a world class K-12 education. Not all are getting it. That's often indicated by what they pay teachers. ;)

BTW, just because a teacher works for peanuts rather than a 50% raise across the country doesn't mean they're a bad teacher. Educated, sane and intelligent people know money isn't everything. There's also a difference in cost of living, that's important to understanding the truth.

https://prezi.com/vvmp4olb-njg/individuals-groups-and-institutions/

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_211.50.asp?current=yes

https://howmuch.net/articles/average-teacher-salary-by-state
high_school-teachers-salary-a929.png




https://usafacts.org/data/topics/pe...ucation/public-school-teacher-salary-average/
 
I do need to state the obvious because you keep leaving it out to form false conclusions.

You didn't form any false conclusions. You knew that by giving an average it does not apply to all students equally.

Guess what, we all knew that same thing. You spend 20 posts telling everyone what they already know because you want to make some partisan issue of a simple fact.
 
Back
Top